[To the Editor of Tun SPECTATOR.] .
Sm,--=The 'article 'by Mr. A. L; Rowse in answer to the questiiiii;-"'What Should we fight for -? " is most 'enlightening. His reply is in effeet that Socialists Would- fight= for Socialism, and fur" no other cause whatsoever. Questions of inter-
- • national. right 'and wrong would seem therefore to be irre- levant. The honour of England, the integrity of the Empire, the safety of 'our -trade routes, . and even of our homes, are not -matters Which interest Mr. Rowse. Only if an aggressor "were an anti--socialist'State would' he and his. party spring to arms. -Even then they would insert a proviso. They, must be led by good Socialists, for " nobody in the Labour MoVeinent 'would be prepared to fight in a war conducted • by the present Government for any purpose whatever."
"- Mr. Rowse leaves us in no doubt as to the reason for his hostility towards - the Government of that very peaceful statesman, Mr: 'Baldwin, who thus appears a greater enemy 'than any'foreign foe. The present Government " fraudulently sold- the- Labour Movement " by keeping us out of a single- handed combat with Italy at a time when the Socialists were-thirsting ".to implement their obligations," and inci-• dentally to attack their pOlitical opponents. We are left. to Judge to what extent sympathy with the Abyssinians.
inspired thiS military-ardour. - - -
Your contributor -justifies this attitude on the strength- of his conviction that ." there can be no peace unless the farces of the Left' are to -*In." That is what the apostles of peace have been -saying at Barcelona -and Malaga during the last week. Peace after -the final defeat of the other side is an understandable ideal, but it is not exactly the
' ideal of our genuine pacifists. - We' must -be grateful to Mr. Rowse. • It is 'useful to have' so frank a statement of his party's much-advertised devotion to a great cause, and of the policy by which he hopes to
Previous page
